‘The conspiracy’ what’s the point?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Balbus, Jan 30, 2006.

  1. Balbus

    Balbus Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,152
    Likes Received:
    2,672


    There has been a lot of talk recently about ‘the conspiracy’

    I’m beginning to wonder if the goals of this conspiracy actually make any sense?

    For example lefties wish to bring in a world where people have a much better quality of life free from exploitation.

    According to Rat ‘the conspiracy’ wants to bring in a world wide fascistic regime. Yet the fascists were if anything nationalistic, which was part of their appeal to so many people and had nationalist goals. For example Hitler claimed to be working for the German peoples, he was seen by many Germans to have restored German pride, after defeat in WW1 and economic chaos. He sold the dream of a German dominated world to the German peoples, that would confirm German superiority and bring about a German Empire of libensraum.

    Yet ‘the conspiracy’ has no nation, the only group that has been mentioned is Jewish but Rat has said repeatedly that it ‘the conspiracy’ is not a Jewish conspiracy. He has said that these are Zionists but even the most fervent Jewish Zionists don't advocate taking control of the whole world so I’m not sure why he makes this point. If he is saying that these Zionist bankers etc are working for Jewish goals then that seems to contradict the many times that he has said ‘the conspiracy’ has no racial dimension.

    So ‘the conspiracy’ has no nation and so no nationalistic goals (in fact Rat seems to be more nationalistic), it has no popular base and no wider constituency than its own (supposedly very small) ranks.

    You see ‘the conspiracy’ is huge it supposedly has control of every major political party on the planet, as well as its control of nearly every political institution or organisation. No political decision in the world without these people knowing about it and directing it. Yet this is done without these huge numbers of people actually knowing they are being employed by ‘the conspiracy’. And they have been doing this for generations yet they have never chosen to ever take over openly until now (or rather very, very soon)?

    When ‘the conspiracy’ becomes the New World Order the identities of the very few people that are at the top of this organisation will be revealed and they will assume the mantel of absolute rulers.

    But to do what?

    To have power?

    Well if you believe what Rat says they already have power they already control virtually every aspect of people’s lives.

    To gain riches?

    According to the people that talk about this conspiracy the people that run it are already rich and if you are absolute rulers what do you need the money for?

    We have already dismissed racial or nationalistic goals.

    In fact once revealed these conspirators would become the target of most people’s hate. You might say that they could use ‘their’ armies to suppress rebellions, but what armies? They have no power base by supposedly pulling the strings from the dark they are unknown. Stepping into the light will only bring them the hatred heaped on deceivers.

    It would seem to me that coming out would be a lot more trouble that it is worth yet that seems to be the only goal of ‘the conspiracy’.

    It makes you wonder what is the point of this conspiracy?

    It seems to be working toward a goal that would be a lot more trouble than it is worth.

    But take away the goal of direct and open global domination what is there?

    What’s the point?

    Their goal doesn’t seem to make any sense.

     
  2. Pointbreak

    Pointbreak Banned

    Messages:
    1,870
    Likes Received:
    1
    Methinks you're missing a 'don't' in there.

    Also you forgot the bit about the gay satanists.
     
  3. Balbus

    Balbus Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,152
    Likes Received:
    2,672
    Thanks Point

    Have now edited it.

    “Gay Satanists”? Have they a political party of their own?
     
  4. Pointbreak

    Pointbreak Banned

    Messages:
    1,870
    Likes Received:
    1
    I believe the Illuminati are gay satanists. Anyway I'm staying out of it until the "experts" have had a chance to respond.
     
  5. Balbus

    Balbus Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,152
    Likes Received:
    2,672
    Now supposedly voting is of no use against ‘the conspiracy’ they can rig elections even control them (because it has no way of getting elected itself) but it cannot be elected out of power because it runs all political parties.

    So what is it’s political agenda?

    Well their agenda is to size power, but if they already have control over all the major political parties in the world, they have power.

    But they want direct and open domination.

    So politically they have control so presumably throughout the world all the political parties have the same agenda to give them direct and open dominion.

    You’d think there’d get their act together a bit, especially since they have supposedly had control over all major political parties for generations.

    So to take an example ‘the conspiracy’ must have forced through the introduction of universal enfranchisement in many countries only because they wanted to overthrow it, while suppressing it in others so that it didn’t.

    What?
     
  6. Balbus

    Balbus Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,152
    Likes Received:
    2,672
    The Illuminati are gay satanists??

    And this has been going on for generations?
     
  7. Nalencer

    Nalencer Dig Yourself

    Messages:
    2,421
    Likes Received:
    2
    They do use nationalism. But instead of using it to turn countries against others (although they do this too) is is used to consolidate everything on the pretext of security. The European Union. There are plans in place to make a unified system of security for Canada, the US and Mexico. This is one of the steps toward the American Union. This will likely consists of America as it's main section, with Canada an Mexico as satellites.
     
  8. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    Messages:
    33,922
    Likes Received:
    2,454
    The ultimate agenda behind the conspiracy is a spiritual one. It's hard to talk to most people who aren't read in this subject because it falls outside of most people's conditioned belief system of what is possible and what isn't possible. What is real, or possible, is only what people have been lead to believe is real and possible through education (indoctrination) and the media.

    Once people understand the esoteric symbolism behind Freemasonry and such secret societies as Skull & Bones and Bohemian Grove, they will understand that the agenda we are dealing with is in fact Luciferian in nature. The ultimate goal is to enslave all of humanity under this New World Order. It goes far beyond money. Money is only used by the Elite for means of control. Money as we know it means nothing to them because they are the ones printing the money. It's ultimately about power and control. When you control the money, you not only control governents and the multinational corporations, but the people as well. Everything is based around money, yet most people don't even understand its true nature. Money is nothing more than a control system. That's all.

    Many people will probably scoff at such a "ludicrous" idea, and that is fine. Whether or not you believe in Lucifer or Molech worship is irrelevent. The fact of the matter is, members of the Global Elite do, and they engage in this activity regularly. This is from where much of their power comes, as did the power of nobodies-turn-tyrants, like Adolph Hitler, who was part of the same secret society network. Most people don't know that Skull and Bones is only the American branch of a much bigger network. Skull and Bones is chapter 322 of a German secret society that was brought to America in 1832 by Alphonso Taft and William H. Russell.

    Contrary to the propaganda, George W. Bush, his father and grandfather are diehard Nazis. I do mean this is the literal sense. They practice Nazi philosophy. Prescott Bush not only funded the Nazis through Brown Brothers Harriman, but all three Bushes are part of the same secret network that gave birth to the Nazis. This network is the Illuminati, which gave birth to Skull & Bones and is the American chapter of a global satanic system that dates back literally thousands of years.

    George Bush is not a Chrsitian. That is simply the party line they want you to believe. George W. Bush and his father are mass-murdering, nazi-supporting, fascist-loving traitors to America, and they worship a far different "God" than most of you have been duped into believing.

    Keep in mind I am not a religious person. I am a deeply spiritual person, however. The major religions were created as a means of controlling humanity and a way to manufacture conflict. This has been the way the Elite has always worked - order out of chaos. Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and all the others, are in fact one religion. They are simply different interpretations of the same sun symbols and characters, all of which date back to Babylon.

    The reason I felt I needed to explain this is because I have been accused by people like Balbus of embracing religion when I talk about the spiritual nature of this agenda to enslave the world. Unlike most people, I know the major religions are all frauds, and I have studied their histories in detail. I may not believe in Jesus, but I do believe in the divine spirit we call God, and I do believe the battle for civilization on this planet is one of good vs. evil.
     
  9. So in other words, the Illuminati, as well as the Bush family and Adolf Hitler, are all gay satanists?

    Pressed Rat, I don't understand how you can say that you wish to 'Analyse the faults in the current system' before you reject capitalism.

    A society (or 'non-society') comprised of anarchists, or similar types of socialists adhering to the decentralisation of government, would by its very nature, not allow such all encompassing dominance and control over the lives of individuals.

    Even though I don't believe in the conspiracy theories you band around, it seems capitalism would provide the perfect stage for such an event, after all, it is an explicitly top-down ruling system anyway. So why is it that you are so willing to dismiss almost every political idea as a shady method of control, yet you are hesitant to dismiss the very system that could allow it to happen?

    For me this is where your conspiracy theory falls flat on its face. And it is also about here i can't see any other motive in your writing other than seeking out the nice little feeling one gets when they are part of an elitist minority that is able to tell the rest of the human race that they are wrong.
     
  10. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    Messages:
    33,922
    Likes Received:
    2,454
    Who said anything about them being GAY satanists? Did I? No, Balbus and Pointbreak did. I am sure some of them do engage in homosexual activity, but that's not the point, nor have I made it a point.

    I mean, it's known that daddy Bush has had sex with young boys (rather, he raped them). But I'd rather not get into that now. If you are interested in the sexual perversions of the satanic elite, I recommend you read The Franklin Coverup by former Nebraska senator John Decamp. Or the documentary titled Conspiracy of Silence, which was scheduled to air on the Discovery Channel in 1994, but was removed from the schedule the day before it was to be aired because of certain members of Congress. You can watch the documentary online, though. Again, it's called Conspiracy of Silence.

    I would not support anarchism because, first, there is no such thing as anarchism. It's only an ideology, and a rather naive one at that. Secondly, these people are not working against the establishment as you believe, they are playing right into its hands (most unknowingly, some knowingly). I cannot think of a single modern-day "anarchist" group that isn't playing into the hands of the establishment.

    Again, socialism, like capitalism, is a creation of the central banks. Apparently you cannot grasp this fact. Socialism is all about state control. This is common knowledge.
     
  11. So please answer the other half of my question - if capitalism is a creation of the central banks, ands like socialism is all about state control, then why are you hesitant to dismiss it, whilst willingly throwing out other political ideologies?

    Another question, if anarchism is an ideology, then what do the actions of "modern day anarchists" have to do with anything? Like we have established before, you have comveniently lumped us all into the same little box..even though you do not know what we do, or what we propose to do.

    Don't tell me what i can and cannot grasp, socialism is also an ideology, a loose one at that. Apparently you cannot grasp the fact that your view of socialism is a rigid and highly exclusive one.
     
  12. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    Messages:
    33,922
    Likes Received:
    2,454
    Who said I am hesitant to dismiss it? Keep in mind that capitalism today is not what it was 100 years ago, before the central banks completely took over in the printing of the paper fiat currency we call money. Today, capitalism is being used to consolidate wealth and power, so all this talk of a "free market" is BOGUS, because you cannot have a "free market" when this so-called "free market" is dominated and controlled by a monopoly. Today's capitalism is actually socialism, since wealth is slowly being removed from the common man and being consolidated by the powerful few. The end goal of the Power Elite is to create a communist, fascistic world government, and this will be done via the centralization and consolidation of power, via the centralization and consolidation of wealth.

    I share the belief that power corrupts, and that absolute power corrupts absolutely. I don't believe in socialism as is sold by the Left. There is no such thing as a utopian socialist society, where the almighty, all-powerful government serves its people and everyone just "shares the wealth" (what a joke!), as the socialists believe and desire. Overly powerful governments by nature have always been corrupt. It seems like many supporters of socialism and communism completely ignore man's inherent nature of corruption.

    Again, socialism/communism, like anarchism, is sold to the masses as something idealistic and good, when in reality it is the complete opposite of that.

    Capitalism at its worst is actually communism, because communism is the consolidation of wealth by the state and those in control over it. Communism is nothing more than monopoly capitalism, and socialism is simply the halfway point between capitalism and communism.

    Ever read the Communist Manifesto? It's all about state control. Much of what Marx outlined (actually, Marx didn't even write it, he simply plagerized it) in the Manifesto has long been a reality in your much-hated "capitalist" society.

    The actions of modern-day anarchists don't have anything to do with anything. It's simply sold to its followers as an ideology, while being used in ways far different than those believed by those who partake in the movement. The term "useful idiot" keeps coming to mind.

    Socialism is socialism. Anarchism is anarchism. I don't know what you're talking about when you refer to these supposedly "other" forms of socialism. So what "forms" of socialism do you embrace? Please elaborate.
     
  13. Ok, I am willing to argue that communism or democratic socialism would work better than the current system, and it would be harder for powerful undeground conspirators to take control simply because communism is the consolidation of wealth by the state (therefore placing strict regulations on where wealth goes), and unlike capitalism, they would not be able to work under the false guise of a "free market".

    However, you say power corrupts, absolute power corrupts. And i am inclined to agree with you. Perhaps a communist state would be no better than the current system, and in the past it has shown itself to be. In fact, I don't think there is one society in history ruled by centralised government that hasn't suffered from some sort of tyranny

    Now as much as you might deny it, you have in the past said that you don't believe a society could function without a centralised government. Now in order for a centralised government to function properly and keep control of a mass of human beings (which you might argue are anarchistic in biological nature), they would have to possess a substantial amount of power. Are you beginning to see the hypocrisy in your statements? You are too cynical to believe that with 'absolute power', governments or wealthy individuals will not take advantage of the circumstances - and you may be right, look at governments throughout history, yet you still hold a utopian idea that capitalism or a similar system might work...yet the only way it could work is to exercise power over the masses...yet power corrupts and ultimately governments will exercise too much power..and it goes round in circles like that.

    Now, I apologise if what you propose as a way of living is not some sort of capitalism, but you haven't made it very clear what you do propose.

    So, taking into consideration what i just said, and taking into consideration that an Anarchist will try to cast off all dependences on a corrupt central government in order to become free from tyranny, what instead should be the type of society to aim for?...that is one that will not allow powerful individuals to squander the wealth that we earn, and one in which people are not "being lied to"

    I'm all ears.

    EDIT: Maybe i'm failing to draw the line between "overly powerful governments" and "powerful governments" but honestly i can't see the difference.
     
  14. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    Messages:
    33,922
    Likes Received:
    2,454
    You are entitled to your own opinions, but I've already explained myself regarding this issue, so there is no need to keep repeating myself.

    I am in favor of minimal government as opposed to no government at all, where any tyrant can rise to power. A minimal government can be kept in check by the people. This is why I favor a constitutional republic over a "democracy." In latin, democracy translates to mob rule. Bejamin Franklin was right when he said:

    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."

    I haven't proposed anything specific. I do believe that money should be issued interest free, and that the Federal Reserve should be abolished. But I have no actual proposals other than that. I don't believe in utopias. I point out the flaws, but I never claimed to have all the answers. I simply refuse to believe that flawed ideologies like anarchism work in reality, when in fact anarchism is a tool used to establish dictatorships. Again, resorting to that old masonic saying: "order out of chaos." Everything is ultimately controlled by the central banks, not governments or corporations, and this is something anarchists do not understand.

    Official history tells us that revolutions throughout history - be it the French Revolution or the Bolshevik Revolution - are the products of the people rising up against the corrupt establishment. In reality, these revolutions were merely created and used by the manipulators to bring about a synthesis. Wall Street funded the Bolshevik Revolution. Anarchism is the same way. If people understood how the system really worked, then perhaps we could get to the root of the problem and understand that it is the central banks in control. A revolution will work ONLY when people become informed, but I see that as a very slim possibility.

    Anarchists might believe that, but there is a difference between what anarchists believe and what applied anarchism really is. Most revolutions that were successful at overthrowing the state and implementing a communist government have resulted in totalitarian dictatorships.

    Like I said, I am in favor of a constitutional republic with limited government kept in check by an informed public. Unfortunately, most people are too stupid and completely apathetic to the world around them, so even my proposals have no weight in the light of reality and where we are headed, which in many ways I feel is beyond our control. You cannot change human nature. You can try, but don't expect to succeed.

    Anarchists believe they are opposing the establishment, when in fact anarchy often sets a precedent to be used to bring about totalitarian control by those working for the big banks. How do anarchists plan on dismantling the system from the bottom up when the central banks exercise power over all governments and multinational corporations? If anarchists don't have the facts, how can they bring about change, and by which means?
     
  15. Pressed_Rat

    Pressed_Rat Do you even lift, bruh?

    Messages:
    33,922
    Likes Received:
    2,454
  16. Pointbreak

    Pointbreak Banned

    Messages:
    1,870
    Likes Received:
    1
    None dare call it conspiracy... well, plenty dare actually. In fact some not only dare to call it conspiracy, they go ahead and publish books on it. But still! I'm sure it only gets better from there.

    It certainly is a product of its time. Total obsession with inflation, which was the bugbear of the 1970s. Of course inflation has essentially been defeated since the 1980s, in the US and in nearly all other developed countries. So the central paranoia of the book has essentially been consigned to the dustbin of history. That's no reason to discredit it.

    But wait! The book has a way to stop the conspiracy: send money to the author (could you ever have guessed?). To help spread the word, of course. Don't worry, your money will go far because he uses "professional mass mailing services". No buy one get one free offer though. But be quick because "In all probability four years from now you will not be able to distribute a book like this." So said Nostradamus, 35 years ago.

    He goes further and names the heroic John Birch Society as the defenders of truth. You know, the John Birch Society, the ones who thought water fluoridation was a communist plot? Similarly, the Civil Rights movement was a communist plot. So your standard far right lunacy.

    And of course it contains the standard Federal Reserve conspiracy, the one which is somewhere near the murky core of Rat's pseudo logic. You know, the central argument which he can't actually explain or defend, but which definitely true, as Nalencer agrees (although he can't explain or defend it either).
    What a coincidence. You subscribe to a political ideology which rises above the left-right paradigm us mere mortals obsess with, yet is so vague and undefined as to be meaningless ("I haven't proposed anything specific. I do believe that money should be issued interest free, and that the Federal Reserve should be abolished. But I have no actual proposals other than that."). Similarly, you rise above the nonsense of religion yet manage to be deeply spiritual by coming up with the radical notion of believing in "God".

    There is a consistency there - you believe in political and religious ideas which you consider so advanced and sophisticated that only a tiny minority has been able to figure them out, but when anyone tries to discuss them then seem to vanish into thin air.
     
  17. I think pressed rat acually did give an honest account of what sort of society he proposes as a counter-defence against exploitation by the supremly wealthy. I do have my disagreements, but i will give him credit for honestly answering my questions.

    Rat, I am still inclined to agree with pointbreak and balbus in the fact that the "conspiracy" idea is comepletely pointless, obssessive and unviable, and this is mostly based on my day to day encounters with human nature. I don't watch a lot of TV, i never paid attention at school, I pretty much base all my opinions on what i observe in the most basic human behaviours, so i don't think you can attribute my belief that the "conspiracy" is farfetched to being "conditioned" in any way. I will definitely look closer into your ideas and sqeeze a book in if I get time and i won't cast any more stones until i have..that is unless you continually assault the very ideas that could save the world from tyrrany.

    As for anarchism Rat I think you need to reassess your view of modern anarchists - Not all of us are bent on agressively opposing the state or bringing about some sort of violent revolution. I am very realistic as well as cynical even and see the road to anarchism (If anarchism will ever come about) as a very slow process that will occur with more and more people becoming disillusioned by totalitarian governments. A peaceful (no force, no blackmail, no property destruction) movement that depends on individuals to make the CHOICE to reject their own government could not be hijacked nor used as a tool to exploit the masses, it could only be opposed by force. So please tell me, how is it that such an occurence could benefit the conspirators you speak of??? And please tell me also, how is a constitutional republic going to be any less of a useful tool? Don't we live in constitutional republics now?
     
  18. Balbus

    Balbus Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,152
    Likes Received:
    2,672
    Rat

    So let me get this clear -

    You believe in God

    And ‘the conspiracy’ believes in the devil.

    You believe that your beliefs are good and that the ‘the conspiracy’s’ beliefs are evil

    That we are involved in a fight between good and evil

    Between a ‘good’ god and a evil ‘devil’

    But you claim this has nothing to do with religion?

    Does anyone else feel that there is a contradiction in these views?
     
  19. Balbus

    Balbus Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,152
    Likes Received:
    2,672
    To me Rat still isn’t telling anyone how people are meant to combat ‘the conspiracy’. Rat and others are very load about telling people what they shouldn’t do but they seem very evasive about what we should do.

    But piecing together Rats comments all the things he does seem to support are ‘national libertarian’ in nature.

    The abolition of the Federal Reserve System

    Believing in the idea of minimal or limited government.

    Protection of US sovereignty and constitution

    Belief in a ‘true’ free market

    Opposing all violations of the right to private property

    Believing in the US form of constitutional republicanism.

    Opposing gun control

    There seems to be a contradiction in seeming to hold libertarian ideas but saying you are not libertarian.
     
  20. Balbus

    Balbus Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,152
    Likes Received:
    2,672
    In fact I think all these things are actually in the US’s Libertarian Party’s manifesto (so it is not surprising that Rat did vote for the Libertarian candidate in the last Presidential elections)

    The thing is that most political analysis’s think libertarianism is hopelessly utopian, but Rat claims he hates utopian ideas and refuses to believe that flawed ideologies can work in reality.

    Another contradiction?

    The socialists, communists and Anarchists are willing to discuss their ideas openly why not Rat?

    Or is there another reason why he will not discuss his libertarian ideas, maybe he already knows that they would not stand up to public scrutiny? That it would soon be seen that if their measures were adopted they would greatly increase the power of the wealthy elite and if left unchecked would probably lead to a plutocratic oligarchy.

    If so why does he have them?

    Another contradiction
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice